Other Columns by Paul M. Weyrich
Paul M. Weyrich Bio

Printer-Friendly Version

Senator Charles E. Grassley (R-IA), one of few non-lawyers to have served on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that Judge John G. Roberts, Jr. is "six times" smarter than the average member of the Senate Judiciary Committee who would vote on the nomination of Judge Roberts for Chief Justice. Grassley hardly overstated Judge Robert's qualifications.

Senator Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) admitted to Fox News television host Bill O'Reilly that he might vote for Judge Roberts (although he probably will not).

For three days Roberts faced the Senate Judiciary Committee without notes, answering questions about memoranda he had written while a special assistant to Attorney General William French Smith and while an associate counsel to President Ronald W. Reagan.

If confirmed, Judge Roberts, age 50 years, would be one of the nation's youngest chief justices. He could serve on the Supreme Court as long as the 33 years his mentor Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist served as an associate justice and as chief justice.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, which includes some leftwing Senators, may vote as early as September 22. The full Senate tentatively is scheduled to vote one week later. As of this writing a filibuster is so unlikely that Judge Roberts could become the Chief Justice of the United States, assuming that office when the Court reconvened October 3rd.

President Bush, in both presidential elections, promised to appoint "Justices like [Antonin] Scalia and [Clarence] Thomas." Would Roberts fulfill that promise? Perhaps not. Justices Scalia and Thomas did not fear breaking precedent when they believed federal law, such as Roe v Wade, upon which much of the Roberts hearing was focused, has not been decided properly. Roberts appeared cautious and willing to rely upon precedent. Senator Schumer said, "[Roberts] is a conservative but a mainstream conservative." Those looking for a revolutionary conservative would be disappointed in Judge Roberts. I suspect his voting record on the High Court would please conservatives most of the time.

President Bush set high standards when nominating Roberts. The problem for Bush is who to nominate for associate justice, to succeed the retiring Sandra Day O'Connor. It is doubtful that the next Bush nominee could match Judge Roberts' intellectual prowess. It might not matter. The battle to replace Chief Justice Rehnquist has been a battle to replace one conservative with another conservative. The left has not fought that hard, having spent little money to defeat the Roberts nomination.

Now comes Armageddon. Justice O'Connor, President Reagan's first appointee to the Supreme Court, sometimes was a swing vote.

The President's nominee to succeed Justice O'Connor could face a more hostile Senate Judiciary Committee than Judge Roberts faced. Yes, Senator Joseph P. Biden, Jr. (D-DE) attempted to launch his presidential campaign by criticizing Roberts. Yes, Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) attempted to fulfill his commitment to be the Lion of the Left. Yes, ranking Democratic Senator Patrick J. Leahy, of Vermont, said before the hearings that he couldn't vote for Roberts and tried to justify his position during the hearings. The Senators' questions may be mild when compared to those the next nominee could face.

>> Continued -- Page 1 2